Guest post: The way the council investigates vote fraud allegations

With all the ostrich-like denials that there’s no vote fraud problem in Tower Hamlets, I thought it would be useful to publish this guest post by Mike Cobb, a journalist living in the Bow Quarter development, off Fairfield Road.

The right to vote was a hard-won thing for many of us. It is only recent history that anyone under 21 could vote, and not much earlier than that that women could vote at all. So it comes as a shock when it appears someone has taken that right away from you.

This is what happened to my wife and I in 2012 when someone de-registered us from the electoral roll and registered themselves in our place.

We should have worked out that something was wrong when the forms for registration failed to arrive. (We thought maybe it was our punishment for failing to vote for the Mayor in October 2010.) However, we just dismissed it.

But then a voting card with the name of someone we had never heard of arrived in the post a couple of weeks before the election for London mayoral elections in May 2012.

So I rang Tower Hamlets council. I wanted to vote and also give the man whose name adorned the card I’d been sent his chance to take part: surely, he’d just filled in the wrong address.

Tower Hamlets were very helpful, but not all that understanding of the situation.

It’s a little confusing at first to be told you don’t live in the home you’ve occupied continuously for 10 years. It’s even more so when told a man you’ve never heard of lives there instead.

But confusion became annoyance when we were told the person who had claimed to be living at our address had in fact de-registered us in the process of moving into our flat as the invisible man.

I was told perhaps a neighbour had done it by mistake. Tower Hamlets would put us back on the register and strike off the other person, as long as I sent them a mail proving this.

At first, this sounded reasonable and I hung up. But some thinking led me to a different conclusion.

The first thing that struck me was we’d lived in our home for 10 years and we knew our neighbours well and the man on the card, whose name was pretty memorable, was definitely not one of our neighbours. And he never had been.

Secondly, Tower Hamlets had asked us for proof that we lived here. Had the man who had registered himself at our address had to do the same?

I called back and pushed a bit. When had we been de-registered? I was told in November 2011. When they dug a bit deeper, the circumstances they gave changed too.

At first, I was told the canvasser had probably made the mistake, only to be now told the form had been filled in and sent back.

Hang on: a form that should have been delivered directly to my door had got into the hands of someone who didn’t even live in my block? And worse, while I was being asked for proof of address to be put back on the list, this person had required none.

I asked how that was possible.

There was confused mumbling down the phone; a belief that Royal Mail may have been at fault held no water with me. Even if the form had been delivered to the wrong address, it seemed unlikely that someone would go through the trouble of crossing people off a list and putting themselves on the list without at least checking they had the right form.

And why didn’t anyone at Tower Hamlets require the same burden of proof as I was asked for?

There was no answer to this one except that simply filling in the form was all it took. Different circumstances, different rules.

I put it to Tower Hamlets that the filling in of a form in the knowledge that you didn’t live there was fraud. And much to my surprise they agreed.

What didn’t surprise me was their solution. They would call the number on the form, a mobile, and see what the now de-registered person had to say for themselves.

I take my right to vote seriously. I can’t help thinking that if someone claims to live where they don’t so they can vote, and takes away someone else’s right to vote as a result, this is something for the police to investigate, not just a call to a mobile that probably doesn’t work.

When I pointed this out, I was told I could call the police myself.

Mild incomprehension greeted my explanation that it wasn’t me who was being defrauded but Tower Hamlets.

So that’s where I left it.

I’m told they will get back to me. And at the time of writing, I’m still waiting.

In the meantime I check under my bed, just in case my mysterious flat mate has taken up residence once more without telling me.

Share this: Facebook & Twitter

Like this:

26 Responses

“Hang on: a form that should have been delivered directly to my door had got into the hands of someone who didn’t even live in my block? And worse, while I was being asked for proof of address to be put back on the list, this person had required none.”

Yes. A brilliant point.

It is a criminal offence to make a false declaration. The law stems from about 1905. If needed, I can try and find title, chapter and paragraph.

Go to the police and get a crime number. Don’t let crooks get away with it. I suspect many others in LBTH will be sharing the same experience. If the police will not take the matter serious complain to the IPCC.

The Electoral Commission is unfit for most purposes. It employs too many foreign lawyers seeking lucrative work in London. It has no ability and no energy to do the things the public expect. Gormless is an apt description.

That’s a load of nonsense. Mr Cobb has a lawful complaint about de facto balloting irregularities. Slagging him off with your belittling comment “if you took your right to vote as seriously as you are trying to make out” suggests you want to cover-up this apparent crime.

The vast majority of ordinary people, regardless of their intellect, are baffled about the most appropriate action they should take. Now if LBTH actually printed on the back of all electoral materials, in large lettering, IF YOU SUSPECT CRIME OR IRREGULARITIES RING THE POLICE ON 020-7230 1212 then the public, whom the LBTH are supposed to serve, would instantly know what to do.

People do not know how to respond because the event shocks them. They have never experienced this sort of potential crime before.

Oh behave yourself! Mr Cobb seems like an intelligent man, so why was he so blase about the whole thing only now to conveniently come out of the woodworks? Perhaps it has something to do with sorting out a fellow journo friend in adding some meat to a particular narrative that he has been pushing, only for judgements to the contrary being delivered by institutes tasked with investigating such matters.

I can see what’s going on here: Mr. Jeory is trying to build up some sort of momentum on what clearly didn’t get going in the first instance.

Mr. Cobb should pop out from behind those security gates and venture out to the station on Bow Road, report the incident to the police and keep us all updated. I suppose when nothing happens, and he gets a good telling off for reporting a alleged crime a year later, we’ll be blaming the police for being in on it too!

doshnombororsassa really seems to hate the publicity given by Mr Cobb to what appears to be criminal behaviour on behalf of we-all-know-who.

I can not understand why doshnombororsassa would want to keep this important local matter secret from everyone in the LBTH and beyond.

Expressing his annoyance with the publicity, all doshnombororsassa can do is to attack the victim. That is perverse but probably the usual behaviour of those who would prefer the entire matter never to come to the notice of the public or the police.

I have and it’s a complete administrative disaster area following the cutbacks. After about 45 minutes of a desk officer who insisted on writing it all down himself despite the fact that I arrived with a typed up report with all the necessary facts relating to the incident – which he refused to read – plus constant interruptions from phones and other officers, I gave up, walked out, went home and reported it online.

Not that many people know that you can report crime online – but that’s another story….

Now, now, Mr. Cat please do stop hissing. I’m not going to be drawn into your game of innuendo and insinuation – I deal with facts.

I have repeatedly called for Mr. Cobb to go to the police and get his allegations looked into. However, I’m a little skeptical as to why the allegations have come to surface now? Allegations of fraud in Tower Hamlets has been in the public domain for years; as a journalist Mr. Cobb should have gone to the police right away knowing that these allegations were being investigated by both The Met and The Electoral Commission. He can’t claim ignorance.

See what’s really happened is some have peddled this fraud story and were waiting for their “I told you so” moment but to their dismay that moment didn’t come from those who are tasked with investigating these matters. Now we’re having these same individuals calling into question the ability and neutrality of those organisations.

The paranoia is laughable and tactics are juvenile.

The atmosphere in TH is poisonous and this paranoia is part of the problem and not the solution.

@you couldn’t make it up! I’m glad you mentioned the cuts and the impacts it has had on policing and other areas such as housing, employment and provision for young people. I have reported crime at Bow Road Station and like you I was dismayed by the service, but that wasn’t due to their incompetence or lack of trying but the lack of resources. That isn’t an excuse for not reporting crime or a suspected crime though…

I repeat again (and have told people at the Electoral Commission), the first step in sorting LBTH out electorally is to take registration of voters out of the hands of the borough (and anyone who has worked there).

This problem is not new and goes back to the unhealthy relationship between local government officers and the Labour party (one struggle, one fight).

The most interesting “shock exposures” these days concern the stories which were reported in the proper way, and then investigated badly. Typically these are the stories which won’t go away no matter how many times official investigators say there’s no case to answer.

The net result usually being that both the problem organisation and the investigating officers end up in a court or a public inquiry having to explain just exactly where they went wrong.

My guess is that the vote fraud saga in Tower Hamlets will be yet another one of these in due course.

I’d certainly urge people to report anything and everything about voting papers which appears untoward to the police. Do it online, keep a copy, get a reference number and file it away! You never know when it’ll come in handy!

* Write out everything that happened and what you were told (as above). Identify people by name.
* Lodge the complaint using email rather than their form and then you have a complete record of when things were sent which cannot be disputed.
* Then count the 10 working days off during which they MUST respond (basically two calendar weeks). That’s a substantive response – not an acknowledgement.
* If they do not respond within 10 days you can then escalate the complaint yourself to Stage 2 which is the management investigation. Write again, referencing the first document (include as an appendix) and the date you sent it in, tell them that you are dissatisfied with their non-response at Stage 1 and state the date by which they need to get back to you with a satisfactory response if they are to avoid the complaint being escalated to Stage 3. (basically 20 working days later)

There’s no question of you needing to wait for the Council to get back to you beyond the time period specified in the Complaints Scheme. This has specified response times (see below) and if they fail to keep to them you can keep escalating the complaint through the different stages all the way to the Ombudsman.

You’ll always get a response at Stage 2 because Stage 3 normally involves a very senior officer (usually a Chief Officer) who will want to know how come his or her time is being wasted with a complaint which should have been properly addressed at a much earlier stage!

You can also escalate complaints to the next stage if you have not been given a satisfactory answer.

If you are not happy with the answer you received at stage 1, you can ask for a management investigation. Staff in our One-Stop Shops can help you do this or you can contact the Corporate Complaints team directly on:

We will send you an acknowledgement within 48 hours of receiving your complaint and tell you who is looking into it. We aim to give you a full reply within 20 working days at stage 2 and 3. If we can’t finish our investigation in time, we will let you know and tell you why.

Stage 3

If you are still not happy with our response at stage 2, you can ask the Chief Executive to look at your complaint. Just let the Corporate Complaints Team know that you want to do this and why.

The Chief Executive will review the previous decisions and decide if they were fair and reasonable. Again, we will aim to deal with your complaint within 20 working days. If we can’t complete it on time, we will tell you why.

I think the clue may just be that Mr Cobb didn’t vote in the 2010 election. The lists used by the polling staff at the polling stations (voters crossed off as they vote) are supposed, after the election, to be secreted away. Some-one may have, illegally, being given access to them. That in itself should be subject to police investigation. I speak as one once a deputy Chief Officer in a major northern Local Authority. From what Andrew Gilligan often reports it would seem that TH is now run with the corrupt standards of the indian sub-continent. Indeed it seems that many still living there actually cast votes in TH elections.

What should be remembered about local elections is that, usually, just 1/3 of the eligible voters vote.

Sometimes the winning majority can be less than a few hundred votes.

It doe not take much effort to create ghost voters who have decided to vote by post.

On the day the council delivers the postal votes by Royal Mail – a date known in advance by all political parties – someone can collect the ghost postal votes, give them to their mates who will fill them in and return them – safely of course – to the council.

This is an established Labour practice all over England. Ex-Labour people use this technique too.

—— VOTER REGISTRATION FIDDLES, EXAMPLE NUMBER 632 ——

There are other ghost postal voter practises in use, all involving people who were born on the Indian sub-continent. It works like this:

Asian 1 goes to loyal Labour Asian household. Asian 1 says to the family can you help this unfortunate person XXXXXX who has got terrible problems back home in Bangladesh, India or Pakistan (use as appropriate) ?

Gullible family says ‘Yes. What can we do to help?’.

Asian 1 says the person (Ghost 1, always a man it seems) has many problems looking after his sick mother/father/parents (emotionally heartbreaking descriptions are used). It will take him (Ghost 1) about 6 months, perhaps longer to resolve. When he returns to England he will not be able to get a job because there is no proof he has lived recently in England. If someone would allow him to be included on the electoral register, when he comes back to England the register who prove he has lived in England before and that will help him get a job and support himself, his wife and his small children.

Gullible family agree. Labour get another Ghost voter.

Asian 1 also asks if mail for Ghost 1 could be sent, temporarily of course, to the family address until he returns (which is never, because Ghost 1 does not exists and therefore is not returning) and if any mail arrives please telephone Asian 1 who will come and collect it. There should not be any more than a few letters.

Election time arrives and Hey Presto the stupid council sent Ghost 1 a postal vote (by mistake of course). Gullible family telephones Asian 1 who gets Asian 2 to collect it and will get the “problem (of being sent a postal vote) sorted-out with the council”.

Months later Asian 1 contacts the gullible family and says Ghost 1 is so very grateful the family have included him on the electoral roll. He says daily prayers for the gullible family etc. Matters are going slightly better for Ghost 1 back home in Bangladesh, Pakistani or India but progress is slow. However the parents are gradually getting better. Asian 1 asks that Ghost 1 be kept on the electoral roll for a bit longer. Nice but gullible family readily agree.

Amazingly the Security Service (MI5) and Special Branch officers know how the system works and will, instantly – in private of course – retort “Corruption is endemic in local government. Postal votes are the tip of the iceberg.” but its a very minor and unimportant matter for them because they are involved in more serious work.

Perhaps everyone should petition His August Worship the Mayor of Tower Hamlets asking him to clean-up the corrupt postal voting system ?

Whether or not Mr Cobb goes to the police, it is important that everyone – as many people as possible – are aware of the typical hanky panky in the disgusting borough of Tower Hamlets.

If more ordinary people know what happens in LBTH especially with dodgy voting matters, more people will be able to make better judgements when they encounter the same or similar. Its called Public Engagement, Education and Enlightenment. Publishing the story on this forum is part of that procedure.

Hi Mrs Odford1.

Council chief officers (sometimes called Directors or Assistant Directors) are these day more concerned with stuffing their briefcases with vast amounts of the public’s cash. Why should any be paid significantly more than the prime minister ?

All the public need is honest capable people who love the public and want to genuinely serve the public not dominate and master them.

Things in the LBTH will never improve until the abandonment of politicisation of local services. No need for the emptying of dustbins, repair of potholes, operation of library services and social services to be politically controlled. The public want good services not sleazy politics,

Time to scrap the executive mayor (and save vast amounts of public money) and return the council to working for the public’s benefit with cross-party committees co-opting members of the public.

Postal Voting in England is a widespread corruption. Often illiterate or semi-literate people (whites as well as non-whites) who have difficulties reading and writing English, vote for candidates they do not know and whose policies they don’t know either.

Then add the GHOST voters and the alleged democratic system – inherently so imperfect in England – becomes utterly unfit for purpose..

How dare the British demand other countries have free and fair voting systems when the British system is so inclined to abuse and corruption ?

A big THANK YOU to LBTH for reminding everyone how fragile ‘democracy’ is.